A new documentary
movie by courageous filmmaker John Ziegler entitled Media Malpractice
made its theatrical début last night in Seattle, Wash. The movie
systematically proves how corrupt and dishonest the American media were
during the campaign of 2008.

The film was revealing, coming just
days after a similar well-orchestrated effort by the Obama
administration, Democratic Party officials, and liberal advocacy groups
in league with the mainstream news media against Rush Limbaugh and Gov.
Bobby Jindal as their primary targets.

Even the president played
his part in the bizarre, staged play by telling congressional
Republicans, “You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things
done.”

Ironically, the plan to attack Limbaugh was already
being hatched while the unfair attacks on Gov. Sarah Palin, documented
by Ziegler, were reaching a crescendo last fall.

The
manipulation can only be called propaganda. Old-fashioned, unbiased
journalism has died. The Limbaugh attacks in the news, we now know,
were cooked up by Democratic strategists James Carville and Stanley
Greenberg last fall. The website Politico.com reveals the White House
involvement in the conspiracy when it reported, “A senior White House
aide has been tasked with helping to guide the Limbaugh strategy.”

Members
of the media are performing their part of the script. Three speeches
and the media’s response to them serve as concise illustrations of the
media role in the propaganda machine. They acted in unison, attacking
and vilifying Limbaugh and mocking Jindal. Conversely, they are a choir
of praises for the “tone of his speech” when reporting about Obama's
address to Congress.

Limbaugh delivered his terrific speech at
the CPAC conference and it was broadcast nationwide. He detailed the
differences between ultra- liberal Barack Obama’s big government agenda
and the ideal of smaller government. He explained why conservatives
care about the individual. Limbaugh’s speech inspired the crowd,
reminding them of the founding principles of America. He showed how
starkly Obama’s philosophy differed from traditional American ideas,
while explaining what exactly is at stake in this present debate.

However,
you wouldn’t know this by listening to the mainstream media. Bill
Schneider on CNN said “Well, it was an angry tone... this was a very
angry speech. They didn't do so well last year but they're still angry.
The tone of this speech was mocking, bullying, it was full of contempt,
and I thought it was a very harsh speech.” David Letterman and Katie
Couric joined the fun mocking Limbaugh’s clothing and his delivery,
this, given the fact that none of the late night comedians have poked
any fun at Obama while they viciously mocked Bush. Chris Matthews
lambasted Limbaugh while needling his guests to disown him.

Now,
compare the reception of Limbaugh’s speech with the media’s reaction to
Obama. They criticized Limbaugh’s tone, ignoring the content. For
Obama, instead, they focused on the rhetoric he uses to mask his
agenda, overlooking his leftist content. While universally praising
Obama’s rhetorical flair, most commentators ignored what Obama actually
said in his address. They omitted talk of the huge deficits, tax hikes
for all through carbon taxes, and the return to class warfare.

David
Gergen oozed about “a rousing speech, took us up to the mountaintops.”
The New York Times reported Obama’s words, “were often stern, but laced
with optimism and humor,” and “he framed his argument with fresh
urgency.” Chris Matthews simply called it “Churchillian.” To top it
off, CBS host Maggie Rodriguez said, “And Americans loved it…then out
comes Bobby Jindal.” Rodriquez called Jindal “Debbie Downer, saying
‘hated it, it’s not going to work’” because he didn’t agree with
Obama’s leftist plan for America.

Talking heads praised Obama
before and after his speech. MSNBC introduced the Jindal speech and
Matthews unprofessionally audibly muttered, “Oh God,” as Jindal
approached the camera.

As if muttering “Oh God” weren’t enough,
Matthews introduced Jindal saying "we're going to hear a fairly
right-wing speech tonight.” Charlie Gibson echoed those sentiments, “He
is a very conservative Republican and you'll hear that reflected, I
think, in his remarks tonight." Yet, not one utterance was heard from
the media about how liberal Obama and his agenda are. Maybe the most
ludicrously biased comments were by Washington Post columnist Amy
Argetsinger, who "found his (Jindal’s) Manson eyes disturbing." The
only exception to the discussion of the content of his speech was to
say that Jindal was far-right.

These three different speeches
provide clear examples of the media’s preferential treatment for
liberal ideas. The media shield the public from true debate. Instead
they propagandize for Obama and the political left. Unfortunately,
media bias didn't end after November 2008.

We have implemented a new commenting system. To use it you must login/register with disqus. Registering is simple and can be done while posting this comment itself. Please contact gzenone [at] horowitzfreedomcenter.org if you have any difficulties.